Domes Founder needs to define the Dream

DayDreamer Domes was the subject of a public hearing convened by the Casco Township Planning Commission on Wednesday September 17, 2025 at 6:00 pm. This hearing was scheduled in response to numerous complaints about activity at the Domes that is not addressed in the special use permit granted to the Domes to operate as a campground. The purpose of the hearing was to review the existing special use permit, current activities at Daydreamer Domes, and consider changes to the permit based on the applicant's request(s). The core issue is whether and what kind of other commercial activity, besides camping, is permitted at the glamping site as an 'ancillary use.'

A phrase was added to the zoning ordinance in 2023, two years after the 2021 permit for the Domes was issued, that allows for the possibility of permitted commercial uses ancillary to a campground. In 2021, Missy Fojtik, proprietor of DayDreamer Domes, was granted permission to operate a small store to serve the needs of campers as an ancillary use, but no additional permissions have been granted.

Chair Andy Litts led the meeting, allowing ample time for both public comment and the public hearing. Spoken comments followed a review of written comments and videos, about 15 in number, that had been submitted to the Township by neighbors of the Domes who reside in the rural residential district. Litts summarized the correspondence and noted that received files had been distributed to all Planning Commissioners.

Prior to hearing from the public, Planning Commissioner Paul Macyauski asked Tasha Smalley, Casco Township Zoning Administrator, if she had any responsibility to answer emails that came to her, implying that some of the complaints could've been addressed prior to this public hearing.

Smalley responded that some emails require immediate responses, which she provides, but she is not the enforcer of the noise ordinance; that is the Board of Trustee's responsibility.

Lisa Touhy, 7266 Elm St, led with the first comment of the public hearing. She agreed that "ancillary commercial use needs to be defined and spelled out." She noted that Fojtik's future plans were "very dreamy" and cautioned the Planning Commission to disallow vagueness. She noted that the Board and public opinion have been disregarded by Fojtik and urged that directives pertaining to the Domes be spelled out "in black and white. Future uses need to be specific."

Litts responded, saying,"'Ancillary use' is meant to be a negotiation process during the special use permit process. That's what the special use process is."

Stephen Earls, 7207 Center Street, spoke next. He read highlights from the letter he submitted to the Township Planning Commission. Four years ago he had been in support of a campground on the site, understanding that there would be no outdoor music, no restaurant, and no events. Regarding ancillary uses, Earls requested "a specific definition so the Township and residents and applicant are all clear." He questioned if a pool party is an ancillary use. He wondered how many parking spots a campground with 15-20 sites needs.

"Daydreamer Domes has been non-compliant for 4 years," Earls continued, saying,"the Township has failed to enforce its ordinances. ...Daydreamer Domes is not a good fit for Casco Township. Given her [Fojtik's] track record of noncompliance, her special use permit for a campground should be rescinded. This is not an unusual or harsh request."

Kat Hoffman, General Manager of Daydreamer Domes, spoke about the offerings at the Domes as being "in step with industry leaders." She said glamping specializes in unique lodging, food, and drink, citing nearby glamping site The Fields as offering cocktail parties and events.

Marci Haynes, 534 B Avenue, spoke in support of the Domes, acknowledging the push to define 'ancillary use.' "Casco Township has an average age of 57 years old; there is virtually nothing for young people to do."

Citing disc golf, the pool, restaurant, and boutique, Haynes said the Domes "is blooming into what it should be. It's up to the Planning Commission to put the limitations on Daydreamer Domes, not the people across the street. Thank you for letting this go on as long as it has. I don't want to see this woman's business shut down."

Steve Earls acknowledged that the Domes may be following industry standards for glamping but argued that glamping sites aren't typically located in rural residential zones.

Dave Campbell of 7174 Ferndell wondered how the Domes has 25,000 followers on Facebook and questioned if something else is going on besides a campground.

A South Haven resident who gave her name as "Fifi" spoke in favor of the domes. She noted that just because the Domes has 25,000 social media followers, it doesn't mean that those followers have been on site. She argued that change is hard and the social life of young people has changed. She and her boys visit and use the pool and buy hot dogs. She considers it a "safe zone" away from busy beaches and crowds.

Rebecca Vanderbeek, 7283 Beverly Drive, noted that the list of activities described by Kat Hoffman were not listed in the special use permit awarded to the Domes for a campground. She asked if there would be a new application for a special use permit that the Planning Commission would have the opportunity to review.

Barb Calhoun of 2782 Elm Street asked how the Michigan Rave Scene might be part of any ancillary activities at the Domes, as that was one of the advertising sites.

Kami, who introduced herself as the Chef at Daydreamer Domes and did not give her last name, said that she lives on site. She said 90% of the people who eat at the restaurant stay on site.

Tasha Smalley the Zoning Administrator questioned her living on the site in an RV and said that needed to be looked into.

Mark Muehlfeld, 439 Blue Star Hwy, noted that the site plan shows 276 parking spots and industrial sized speaker systems. To him, "it seems like a special events venue that gets bigger and bigger. Why would you advertise and hold these events when your special use permit is at stake? The party atmosphere on weekends in the summer is the emphasis, and the drinking," which raised safety concerns for him as people leave the site.

He noted that "plans are vague, 'as we deem necessary,'" cautioning the Planning Commissioners that "the vagueness will be exploited unless you get firm definition." He is concerned about the Domes becoming an indoor party venue and argued that ''wellness' is not 'what makes me happy.''

Missy Fojtik responded to this. She described the Domes as "a place to be happy. This is my dream. I always wanted food. My plans have changed because of outside forces I couldn't control. It has not been my intention to color outside the lines; this is a new process for me. The system is not clear. I've been emailing Allan [Overhiser, the Casco Township Supervisor] when I should've emailed Tasha [Smalley, the Zoning Administrator]. Every time there was a complaint I responded to it. I have never done damage to anyone's property. I have never broken any laws."

She responded to complaints about noise by saying, "The groovapalooza is an old lady dance party. I have 60,000 followers; what I have built is a work of art. It took a lot of guts. I did it to please people. We end [the music] when the sun goes down. I feel like I have been responsible, like my heart is in the right place. I offer $5 pool passes; sorry that 30 people don't like it."

Chair Andy Litts opened the floor to the Planning Commissioners to ask questions of Fojtik.

Dian Liepe said, "In the original paperwork for the special land use permit, you indicated you wouldn't have music. You've gone against what we agreed to. We allowed camping in this rural residential area. There are other campgrounds in the Ag area, but not in RR (rural residential zoning). In a RR area, we wouldn't want to see a big concert; we have to be careful with any extra uses we would approve. A restaurant and pool are both ok. But a wedding is an event. That is separate from a campground. We have rules that we set up; we spend a lot of time [on the permitting process.] Sometimes we get it right; sometimes we have to review it. We do the best we can for the whole community."

Fojtik responded that she was not sure she wanted to do weddings after doing one. She proposed that "it's not music--it's not a concert, a full on band." She questioned how she could be held accountable for what she said in 2021.

Paul Macyauski said, "What happened in 2021 is water under the bridge. Let's forget about 2021."

Litts said that these conversations get put into the minutes and inform decisions made by the Planning Commission. He then asked why more rustic sites were being pursued if the 9 rustic sites already granted have not been used.

Fojtik responded that she is seeking to buy inflatable tents as a way of providing all equipment to rustic campers. These would be inflated on a wooden platform. There would be no bathroom in the tent. This would augment her current offering of 17 operating domes. Thirty domes were the original plan.

Discussion turned to the site plan that was submitted with other materials for this meeting. The site plan is not legible and the Planning Commissioners were unclear about what they were being asked to approve. The site plan was dated from 2021 and does not show the site as it was actually constructed.

Greg Knisley asked about a 'sound vibe event with DJ bands.' He noted that in the ads, camping is never mentioned. He noted that campers are not creating the noise. "You are emanating the noise. You don't have that many campers. This is a major deal; this is over noise you have created, whether it's outside vendors that you are employing as you are trying to create an experience; you have everything but camping."

Fojtik responded that she has many ways of marketing the Domes, meaning the Domes site can show up in many places on social media.

She responded to the noise comments by saying "As far as the music goes, I did not realize how weirdly the music was carrying. If I wasn't above 65 decibels, I was fine. Now 52db at the porch is what we do, and I control amperage on the speakers."

Dan Fleming challenged Fojtik for a statement she made earlier in the meeting, "'How can I be held accountable for what I said?'" He wondered why she would not be accountable for what she had said.

Fojtik responded by saying she had wanted incinerator toilets, but she doesn't have them now.

Knisley, using the example of The Fields, said "that applicant had ideas about what she had done once and thought she might want to do again; she got everything taken care of prior to doing it. Because you are in residential, we are going to weigh in on this. Once you zero in [on an activity], was it approved on your original application?"

In an attempt to being to define what uses might be approved, Chair Andy Litts introduced a few items on a list, beginning with the restaurant. He asked Missy Fojtik who can use the restaurant.

She responded, "everyone who comes on my property as a guest."

The brief discussion covered hours of the restaurant, number of days of the week it would be open, and the number of seats in the restaurant. Litts said a restaurant is not permitted in the rural residential zone. Patrons would need to have a day pass or stay on the campground.

The discussion turned to use of the pool, how it is secured after hours, and the number, type, access to and location of bathrooms.

Litts raised the question of day passes, saying the concept needed clarification. Macyauski concurred, asking Fojtik what she is doing "to mitigate the health, safety, and welfare for the rest of the Township," which is the mission of the Planning Commission.

Macyauski inquired further about day pass holders: "You don't know who they are, where they are; they can't slip away to the pond in the back and show up at 10 pm?"

It was clear by now that the Planning Commission was looking for specificity from the applicant that was not forthcoming.

Richard Nugent of 7145 Windcliff Drive said, "Sometimes it's difficult to navigate our Township. We have ordinances and statues and we're all expected to live within those. Once it's approved, people should have to live within it. Whatever you decide, we have to live within it." He noted the specificity that the Planning Commission sought and said the process has been frustrating and clarity is needed.

A patient Litts once again asked Fojtik for a list of activities she is currently providing or seeking to provide, including activities that have music associated with them.

Fojtik responded that she seeks to "augment activities for my guests; sauna sessions; huddling around a fire; snowshoeing in the winter; things drop in my lap" and she charges between $5 and $50.

Julie Cowie, 7376 101st Ave, commented on the process. "You [planning commissioners] are working harder than the applicant, and that is backwards." Using herself as an example, she said she stopped in to the restaurant, had a delicious breakfast, and left--without buying a day pass.

Cowie also referenced a planning commission discussion from home-based businesses twenty years ago. "The principle was, are customers coming to a house on a regular basis? We have other campgrounds in Casco but they do not have a revolving door of visitors." She noted that the current process was likely overwhelming for the applicant and suggested that Fojtik and the Zoning Administrator work things out outside of the meeting.

Bruce Rowling, 473 Blue Star Hwy, argued that a day pass should be consistent, "not different amounts, different times. A day pass to a pool should always be $10. Day passes should be very regimented because this is how she's getting around ticketed events."

Commissioner Dan Fleming agreed, saying "a day pass should have the same price and same hours."

Fojtik said, "it is my business and I don't know myself. I need a framework to operate within. We're just a startup, we're figuring it out."

Knisley asked Fojtik directly, "When the Township asked you to stop, did you stop?"

Fojtik responded, "in my mind, I did. I didn't consider [that advertised event] music, it was dancing. I don't consider that a music event."

Chair Litts closed the public hearing and the attention turned to the Zoning Administrator who will follow up with the applicant.

Items that the Planning Commission sought further clarity about include:

• The store in the main building and outside vendors also coming on to the site

• The original plan that was approved, the actual site that was constructed, and the desired future expansions

• Details on operation of the restaurant including if it will be open to the public

• Day passes, which are not addressed in any manner in the zoning ordinance

• Trailer on site that provides housing to staff members

• A copy of the campground rules

• Pool use and security

• Onsite recreation

• Events, with and without music

• Inflatable tents and whether sites are still considered rustic by EGLE/State of Michigan

• Driveway, parking, and flow of traffic

• SHAES approvals

The Zoning Administrator said she had additional questions for the proprietor.

Chair Litts invited further public comment.

Charles Mannion, 6611 Deer Trail in Ganges Township, noted "a great deal of difference between the applicant and the Commission. You were asking her to put together a plan. She needs to know what the rules are. Maybe the applicant needs to invest in a consultant to get this stuff together so she can make this all work out. We have a business owner who would like to grow the business; this is not a bad thing. Deal with just the facts."

Mark Muehlfeld, 439 Blue Star Hwy, said, "I'm confused on some of the comments. It's her responsibility to understand the ordinances. She is operating in a Rural Residential area. I've heard a lot of, 'I didn't know, I didn't know.' It's not an event venue. Everything's being vague so it can go whatever direction it can go."

The meeting adjourned after a three hour discussion.

The proprietor of Daydreamer Domes needs to define her dream.

Planning Commissioners Kelly Hecker and Ryan Brush were absent. No specific follow-up meeting was identified. The Casco Township Planning Commission meets on the third Wednesday of the month at 6:00 pm at the Casco Township Hall, 7104 107th Avenue.

The public gathers for the Planning Commission Public Hearing on DayDreamer Domes